AHRQ Series

Subscribe to collection
FilterHide Filter
  • AHRQ Series Part II: Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness - Guest Editor, Mark Helfand

    Assessing applicability when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program

    Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
    Vol. 64Issue 11p1198–1207Published online: April 4, 2011
    • David Atkins
    • Stephanie M. Chang
    • Gerald Gartlehner
    • David I. Buckley
    • Evelyn P. Whitlock
    • Elise Berliner
    • and others
    Cited in Scopus: 46
      To describe a systematic approach for identifying, reporting, and synthesizing information to allow consistent and transparent consideration of the applicability of the evidence in a systematic review according to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Setting domains.
    • Discussion

      AHRQ Series Paper 1: Comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program

      Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Vol. 63Issue 5p481–483Published online: October 2, 2008
      • Jean Slutsky
      • David Atkins
      • Stephanie Chang
      • Beth A. Collins Sharp
      Cited in Scopus: 43
        In 2005, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality established the Effective Health Care (EHC) Program. The EHC Program aims to provide understandable and actionable information for patients, clinicians, and policy makers. The Evidence-based Practice Centers are one of the cornerstones of the EHC Program. Three key elements guide the EHC Program and thus, the conduct of Comparative Effectiveness Reviews by the EPC Program. Comparative Effectiveness Reviews introduce several specific challenges in addition to the familiar issues raised in a systematic review or meta-analysis of a single intervention.
      • Review Article

        AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program

        Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
        Vol. 63Issue 5p502–512Published online: September 29, 2008
        • Roger Chou
        • Naomi Aronson
        • David Atkins
        • Afisi S. Ismaila
        • Pasqualina Santaguida
        • David H. Smith
        • and others
        Cited in Scopus: 128
          Comparative effectiveness reviews (CERs) are systematic reviews that evaluate evidence on alternative interventions to help clinicians, policy makers, and patients make informed treatment choices. Reviews should assess harms and benefits to provide balanced assessments of alternative interventions. Identifying important harms of treatment and quantifying the magnitude of any risks require CER authors to consider a broad range of data sources, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

        The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


        We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the Cookie Preference Center for this site.
        Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties.


        RELX